ReviewMovement disorders clinical practice2019
Cost-Effectiveness of Deep Brain Stimulation With Movement Disorders: A Systematic Review.
Review in Movement disorders clinical practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic Evaluations Comparing Deep Brain Stimulation to Best Medical Therapy for Movement Disorders: A Meta-Analysis.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Pooled it
- Global Economic Evaluation of the Reported Costs of Deep Brain Stimulation.Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery · 2024Pooled it
- Modelling the Cost Effectiveness of Treatments for Parkinson's Disease: An Updated Methodological Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Pooled it
- Budget impact analysis of deep brain stimulation devices with different longevity in Parkinson's disease: insights from real-world data.Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
- Functional Connectivity and Volumetrics Improve Outcome Prediction for Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2025Article
- Managing Lead Fractures in Deep Brain Stimulation for Movement Disorders: A Decade-Long Case Series from a National Neurosurgical Centre.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Why are clinical trials of deep brain stimulation terminated? An analysis of clinicaltrials.gov.World neurosurgery: X · 2024Article
- Surgical Outcomes in Rare Movement Disorders: A Report of Seventeen Patients from India and Review of Literature.Tremor and other hyperkinetic movements (New York, N.Y.) · 2022Review
- Neurologists' Attitudes Toward Use and Timing of Deep Brain Stimulation.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2021Article
- Current Therapies in Clinical Trials of Parkinson's Disease: A 2021 Update.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Transcranial Focal Electrical Stimulation Modifies Biogenic Amines' Alterations Induced by 6-Hydroxydopamine in Rat Brain.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Single-Stage Deep Brain Stimulator Placement for Movement Disorders: A Case Series.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- The Child & Youth CompreHensIve Longitudinal Database for Deep Brain Stimulation (CHILD-DBS).Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2021Article
- Implantable Pulse Generators for Deep Brain Stimulation: Challenges, Complications, and Strategies for Practicality and Longevity.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Deep-Brain Stimulation for Essential Tremor and Other Tremor Syndromes: A Narrative Review of Current Targets and Clinical Outcomes.Brain sciences · 2020Review
- Advantages and Recent Developments of Autologous Cell Therapy for Parkinson's Disease Patients.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2020Review
- Economic evaluation of deep-brain stimulation for Tourette's syndrome: an initial exploration.Journal of neurology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMovement disorders (MDs) are increasingly being managed with deep brain stimulation (DBS). High-quality economic evaluations (EEs) are necessary to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of DBS. We conducted a systematic review of published EEs of the treatment of MDs with DBS. The review compares and contrasts the reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and methodology employed by trial-based evaluations (TBEs) and model-based evaluations (MBEs).
methodsMeSH and search terms relevant to "MDs," "DBS," and "EEs" were used to search biomedical and economics databases. Studies that used a comparative design to evaluate DBS, including before-after studies, were included. Quality and reporting assessments were conducted independently by 2 authors. Seventeen studies that targeted Parkinson's disease (PD), dystonia, and essential tremor (ET), met our selection criteria.
resultsMean scores for methodological and reporting quality were 73% and 76%, respectively. The ICERs for DBS compared with best medical therapy to treat PD patients obtained from MBEs had a lower mean and range compared with those obtained from TBEs ($55,461-$735,192 per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] vs. $9,301-$65,111 per QALY). Pre-post ICER for DBS to treat dystonia was $64,742 per QALY. DBS was not cost-effective in treating ET compared with focused-ultrasound surgery. Cost-effectiveness outcomes were sensitive to assumptions in health utilities, surgical costs, battery life-span, model time horizons, and the discount rate.
conclusionsThe infrequent use of randomized, controlled trials to evaluate DBS efficacy, the paucity of data reporting the long-term effectiveness and/or utility of DBS, and the uncertainty surrounding cost data limit our ability to report cost-effectiveness summaries that are robust.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.